Pest outbreaks can have catastrophic effects on farmer’s crops, their livelihoods and the food security of families and their communities. The African armyworm poses such a threat. For example, in 1999 armyworm outbreaks devastated 311,000 hectares of grassland in Tanzania. Farmers who did no spray their land lost the majority of their crops, while cattle that grazed on infected land also died.

Farmers are often unprepared because forecasts from the national forecasting service do not always reach them in time. There is desperate need for the development of community-based forecasting, where villagers in high risk areas are taught how to predict armyworm and other pest outbreaks. This will encourage farmers to check their crops more often, communicate the impending dangers of pest attach more rapidly, and build-up local knowledge based on local conditions.

Research into Use (RIU) has outlined how decision makers need to take some of the following steps:

• Ensure supplies and distribution of safe and effective pesticides at prices farmers can afford
• Fund, educate and train extension services on how to deal with pest outbreaks
• Create conditions that encourage private enterprise in agro-services, for example marketing armyworm forecast packs, traps and lures, and providing contract spraying, transport, distribution and micro-credit services.

Research by the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) on this issue is available on R4D through the following link: Economic evaluation and international implementation of community-based forecasting of armyworm.

It is not long since biofuels offered policy makers a popular policy option, perceived to have long term benefit for the environment. However, the biofuels debate has moved on. This is largely due to new and robust scientific evidence that shows there is far more to consider in the biofuels policy debate.

Biofuels do reduce greenhouse gases because they sequester carbon through their growth. Yet, in October 2007 the OECD warned against the widespread implementation of ‘agro-fuel’ policy programmes. Realisation that policies favouring ‘agro-fuel’ production could lead to surging food prices and prove a major issue for global food security began to spread. This was because previous analysis had failed to count the carbon emissions that would occur as farmers respond to higher prices and convert forest and grassland to new cropland.

Research published in Science, 29^th February 2008 found that corn-based ethanol could nearly double greenhouse emissions over 30 years and increase greenhouse gases for 167 years as a result of land-use change. Biofuels are commonly produced from specifically grown crops, but can also be produced as a by product of other agricultural activities. The latter offers a much safer and sustainable policy option.

The two main types of biofuels are biodiesel made from vegetable oils, and bioethanol, made from sugar or starch. The European Union is the main producer of biodiesel, but bioethanol accounts for most global production. The USA and Brazil are the main producers.

It is predicted that 90% of fuel in sub-Saharan Africa comes from biofuels, such as wood and animal waste. This is possible without taking-up valuable farmland, and offers a more sustainable option for communities. Only when food security is no longer an issue for the developing world should the widespread adoption of agro-fuel policies be considered. For the benefit of people of these countries we need to look for more sustainable biofuels production methods, which ensure better food security and have less negative environmental impacts.

R4D has a wide range of research on biofuels, such as that that developed through the Policy Innovation Systems for Clean Energy Security (PISCES). This project aims is to increase available knowledge and understanding of policy relevant trade-offs between energy, food and water security for livelihoods in relation to bioenergy.

The CABI Global Summit was opened by DFID’s Chief Scientist Chris Whitty on Monday evening. His address spoke of the need to combine new evidence based knowledge and advanced technologies with a flexible approach to policy making. This message was carried forward into the first panel session – Food security: Helping to achieve Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty and Hunger. The session brought forward the need to develop food policy that brings about ‘practical solutions for growing more and losing less’.

The 20^th century saw the world population increase from 1.5billion to 6 billion people. This has created a challenge in terms of global food security, now and over the long-term. Despite increasing food production per capita of the global population, the allocation of food resources is very uneven. The challenge of food security will not stand still, and it is predicted that food production will need to double by 2050 to feed the worlds expanding population.

This situation has been exacerbated by the increasing demand for meat globally, and the basic resources in terms of land and food staples required in its production. This is one factor that has led to the rapid rise in food prices over more recent years, putting an estimated 100 million into absolute poverty, especially in many developing countries where low incomes (less than $1 per day) make it difficult to access food.

Session panellist Professor Rudy Rabbinge of CGIAR Science Council believes that global food security is possible, but we must find better ways of ensuring access to food is improved by employing the best possible agricultural practices, and removing the temptation towards biomass production, stating ‘fuel security with biomass is an illusion’.

Dr Akinwumi Adesina from the DFID funded Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) argued for the need for ‘locally directed change’. He thinks this is possible through a small-holder based green revolution. But first, new sets of policy instruments need to be developed to support smallholder farmers to access new agricultural technologies, reduce the impact of climate change and adopt sustainable land-use practices. More sustainable land-use practices might allow farmers in Africa to benefit from global carbon markets.

The panel acknowledged that over the last three to four decades agriculture has suffered from serious under investment. Dr Julie Flood of CABI highlighted the important role improved plant health could play in improving agricultural productivity in developing countries. An estimated third of production is lost annually from pests and diseases. She went onto to outline how CABI’s plant health initiative works with partners to deliver in-country plant health advice to farmers. This type of initiative is set to be crucial for the development of a knowledge-based ‘green revolution’ in developing countries.

Other panellists included: Dr Andrew Daudi (Chair), Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Research and Food Security, Malawi; His Excellency Joaquim Chissano, Former President of the Republic of Mozambique; and Dr Richard Tingem Munang, United Nations Environment Programme.

More conference blogs:

Better farm productivity is not enough – We need to “talk more about losing less”
Food Security – helping to achieve MDG1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

Chris Whitty talks about some of the global challenges in food security at the recent CABI Global Summit: Food Security in a Climate of Change, London October 19-21 2009

The DFID funded Fisheries Management Science Programme (FMSP) has completed a number of research projects that show how fisheries contribute to food security in developing countries. Fish are said to provide the main source of animal protein to about one billion people globally. In low income food deficient countries (LIFDCs) they make up 22% of animal protein consumption. In these countries small scale fisheries are hold particular importance for food security. 95% of the 38 million people employed in fisheries worldwide are in developing countries.

Research has found that small scale fishers do not usually sell on their catch until their own subsistence levels have been met. The amount that is kept is relatively constant, and not governed by the size or the value of the catch. Subsistence remains a priority to the majority of people in developing countries, and it is important that their livelihoods are protected and sustained.

The nutritional value of fish is well known by most people. Fish are a good source of protein, micro nutrients and essential fatty acids. It provides a valuable balance to the diets of those people in developing countries who have a predominantly carbohydrate-based diet. Indigenous fish, which are often eaten whole, can also provide an important source of calcium and other micronutrients.

FMSP has undertaken a number of projects that have successfully increased the food security benefits to poor people from small-scale fisheries. For instance, FMSP identified a number of management strategies to improve the management strategies of inland fisheries. This project focused on self-recruiting species, which by definition do not require regular and repeated re-stocking. However, the restocking of collected juveniles and screening pond entrances are just some of the strategies used to ensure that the food security benefits of fish are sustained.

The sustainability of existing fish stocks are undoubtedly under threat due to global population growth. Many fish stocks are now overfished and unproductive, often making fish expensive. As a result there are increasingly competing demands on fishery resources. Local fishers often have to compete with industrial fishing boats, and frequently lose out on previously reliable fish resources. This has serious implications for their food security, and makes the protection of small scale fishers’ access rights important.

FMSP has been working with people in developing countries to address some of the conflicts over resources and access to them. For example, a project in northern Mozambique helped to establish a three mile exclusion zone where industrial fleets were banned from fishing. This ended an ongoing conflict between local small-scale fishers and industrial boats over gear entanglement.

There is clearly a need to ensure that fishers continue to provide a source of food security for millions of people worldwide, especially in developing countries, where fish provides subsistence and nutritional balance. There must be continued efforts to ensure fish stocks are managed appropriately, production increased, and small-scale fishers supported in conflicts over access to fishing resources.

You can find out more about the FMSP on R4D and through the projects own website: http://www.fmsp.org.uk

Consumers and policymakers are often unaware of the environmental and social impacts associated with their choice of food. The concept of ‘food miles’ is often associated with the argument that it is best to buy goods that have travelled the least distance. Long-distance transport of food is linked to increased transport emissions.

DFID funded research ‘Fair Miles? Weighing environmental and social impacts of fresh produce exports from Sub-Saharan Africa to the UK’ has shown that the correlation between food miles and emissions is not always fair. Especially when looked at in context.

High value produce from Africa, especially flowers and horticulture that are air-freighted, are being singled out as being forms of unsustainable consumption. But in terms of development and poverty reduction, the inclusion of sub-Saharan Africa in these high-value markets has proved a success. The UK imports over £200 million worth of fresh fruits and vegetables from sub-Saharan African countries, and many of these rely on the UK market to support their domestic industry.

Air freight is a significant contributor to food transport emission in the UK. 1.5% of imported fruits and vegetables arrive in air transportation but that portion produces 50% of all emissions from fruit and vegetable transportation. An air-freighted kilogram of green beans from sub-Saharan Africa to the UK has the same level of carbon emissions as 177 sea-freighted kilograms.

As part of this study researchers carried out a life cycle analysis to compare UK and Kenyan energy use to the farmgate and UK port of entry. This analysis looks critically at the potential trade-offs of food miles and their potential for positive outcomes.

For example, there an estimated 1-1.5 million people whose livelihoods depend on the supply chain linking African soil and consumption in the UK. This in conjunction to the fact that air freight of fresh fruit and vegetables accounts for less than 0.1% of total emissions from transport of UK fruit and vegetables. From a development perspective this means that air freight from sub-Saharan Africa is a relatively efficient ‘investment’ by the UK in allocating its carbon emissions.

However, life cycle analysis also shows that food imports to the UK have other environmental implications for producer countries that must be considered. Research has shown that production of green beans from Africa to the UK uses the equivalent amount of water to supply 13 million Kenyan people for one year. This is an interesting fact given that Kenya is classed as a ‘chronically water scarce’ country. Nevertheless, given the poor state of water resource management and infrastructure in Kenya, water used for agriculture is not actually diverted from the population.

This research clearly shows that there is a great deal to consider on the issue of food miles. If you would like to know more the project document is available on R4D.

Greenpeace funded research undertaken at the University of Aberdeen has shown how agriculture holds a number of solutions for climate change. Many people blame modern farming practices for accelerating climate change. However, this research suggests that it might be time to stop pointing the finger, and work proactively with agriculture to mitigate climate change.

Research has shown that agriculture can play an important role in reducing all of its direct emissions through the process of mitigation. Mitigation involves the sequestration of carbon, and can be achieved through a number of different agricultural practices. For instance, rotating crops with legumes such as peas and beans helps fix nitrogen in the soil and reduce reliance on fertilizers. While reducing tillage helps restore the carbon content of degraded soils, limiting soil disturbance which leads to the release of carbon.

There is no doubt that agriculture produces a significant level of the world’s greenhouse gases (GHG’s) (between 16.8-32.2%). The main GHG’s associated with agriculture are nitrous oxide and methane. Direct emissions come from livestock and the soil, and indirectly from fertilizer production, fossil fuel use and changes in land use, particularly associated with deforestation.

Livestock are the main source of methane, and this is a growing concern given the ever increasing demand for meat in developing countries. These countries have the greatest increase in meat consumption in recent years, increasing by 77% from 1960-1990. Three sources contribute 88% of this increase in developing countries: soil nitrous oxide emissions, methane from livestock and biomass burning.

A striking example of how agriculture may be leading to the acceleration of climate change can be found in Brazil. Between 2001-2004 93,700 square kilometres of rainforest were destroyed to make way for cattle and high energy feed crops. This kind of practice is of great concern because rainforests play a crucial role in the sequestration of carbon. A short term goal must be too stop deforestation, and this deserves major political attention.

China and India are guilty of dramatically increasing their fertilizer and manure use to meet the demands of rapid population growth. However, it is very difficult for other countries to criticise these intensive practices. Farming in many developed countries plays an equal if not more dominant role in climate change acceleration.

The role agriculture plays in accelerating climate change is a global problem. The evidence exists to show that agriculture can play a positive role in mitigation significantly reduce the GHG’s it produces. This is a global problem, which requires global solutions. We cannot expect developing countries, particularly those with tropical forests, to fight this issue alone. Every country and region must understand the role agriculture plays in accelerating climate change, and begin to implement those practices that can significantly reduce its impact.

R4D contains a wealth of knowledge on Climate Change, Agriculture, and Food Security.

The ability of farmers to adapt to climate change in Benin is dependent on them having access to information and involving them in decision-making. That is the key recommendation made by the DFID funded Climate Change Adaptation in Africa (CCAA) research and capacity development program.

In Benin, agriculture represents 36% of the GDP and 88% of export revenues. This means agriculture is vital to the national economy. Climate change has brought about extreme variations of weather in West Africa over recent decades. Droughts and floods have begun to follow each other in succession causing widespread concerns among the farming community and beyond.

Growing seasons are no longer predictable and as a result adaptation is crucial. For instance, a rural township in Southern Benin called Tori-Bossito, has seen the pattern of farm life completely disrupted. The crop cycle once dominated by two dry and two rainy seasons has changed dramatically. Harvested maize used to be dried under September’s sun, but this is no longer possible because September has increasingly become a wet month.

Benin researchers have calculated that if nothing is done to adapt agriculture to climate change, yields of maize, peanuts, cassava, cowpeas and rice could fall by 6%. In real terms this is a highly significant drop. Further, cotton, an important cash crop in Benin, could decline by as much as one-third.

The CCAA program in Benin seeks to give farmers the means to make informed decisions on when crops should be sown and harvested. This rests on the sharing of knowledge between researchers, farmers and local decision makers over climate variability. The aim is to remove farmers’ vulnerability to in this situation, and to increase food security.

The program favours practical action and shared learning among all the relevant stakeholders. Across Benin rural municipalities known as ‘communes’ will bring stakeholders together to form pre-alert committees. Here information will be shared on the risks of drought and tropical storms, among other hazards. Adaptation strategies will be developed, tested and implemented at the local level to ensure that different contexts are taken into account. This is a crucial element within the process of adaptation.

Farmers in Benin are traditionally isolated from this form of knowledge, and this program aims to readdress the balance. In September 2007 floods ravaged Benin destroying around 50 villages. Farms were hit hard, and it is hoped that in the future well communicated weather warnings will limit the effects of this kind of disaster.

In terms of adaptation for flooding, improvements need to be made in building standards. This will largely involve discouraging construction on flood-prone and unstable land. To combat drought, adjustments need to be made to the agricultural calendar, the adoption of cultivation practices that retain soil moisture, the introduction of drought-adapted plant varieties, and better management of rainwater runoff and wells.

This program has brought the need for agricultural adaptation along with knowledge brokering to the fore. However, Benin is not alone in the challenges it faces. To find out more on the CCAA’s work in Africa visit their project file on R4D through the following link: Climate Change Adaptation in Africa (CCAA)

If you are interested in the debates surrounding climate change, agriculture and food security the CABI global conference ‘Food Security in a Climate of Change’ takes place in London, October 19-21.

Recent history has seen a rapid growth in agricultural yields. This has seen the global food supply outstrip demand. Across Europe, for instance, concerns over food security have been superseded by policy concerns over what to do with too much food. However, this growth and level of production has not been gifted to all parts of the world.

Many countries throughout the world are experiencing diminishing level s of productivity. Factors such as rising populations and changing demographics, land degradation, price shocks, HIV/AIDS, credit arrangements and climate variability inhibit productivity for many.

Climate change is having both positive and negative impacts on agriculture and production levels. Certain places will benefit from changing climate conditions, making it possible for them to grow new crops or increase current production levels. However, it is painfully apparent that many poor countries in the tropics and sub-tropics will face a growing threat from food shortages.

A DFID funded consultation document has highlighted the need for climate change to play a central role in agricultural development programmes.  The Agriculture and Food Security document was put together by the International Institute for Environment and Development (iied) and is available on R4D. The main output of the consultation was to highlight some of the key researchable issues surrounding climate change and agriculture.

A great deal of current research focuses on understanding climate change impacts on agriculture, although agricultural adaptation has also become an important research theme.  Research seems to favour commercial agriculture, and this means research on climate change and subsistence agriculture is lacking. This is likely to prove an important challenge for development given the prominent contribution agriculture makes to GDP, employment and peoples livelihoods in many developing countries.

In general, predictions over the course of climate change and its impact on agriculture are difficult to predict at the regional level. The affects of climate change on agriculture will certainly not follow a linear path, and this makes adaptation strategies difficult to put together.

Research on adaptation must also consider social and economic factors such as population growth, urbanisation, human and livestock diseases, biotechnology, water management and economic globalisation.  In other words, adaptation strategies should not be formed around meteorological factors alone, and be aware of socio-economic impacts.

At the heart of the consultation document is the overarching need to bring about an interdisciplinary understanding of agriculture, climate change and food security.

If you are interested in the debates surrounding some of the issues discussed here the CABI global conference ‘Food Security in a Climate of Change’ takes place in London, October 19-21.

The Royal Geographical Society was the illustrious location of one of the opening workshops of the 6th World Conference of Science Journalists. This session, sponsored by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) as well as DFID was on the theme of ‘Food Security and Sustainability- can we avert a food crisis’? See workshop outline and speaker profiles here- http://www.wcsj2009.org/pre-conference_workshops.php

A wide variety of speakers, including DFID’s John Barrett talked about hunger as a global challenge and what application of science can do to combat this. Set against a backdrop of over I billion people worldwide who are currently chronically undernourished, 180 million children severely underweight for their age and 400 million women of child bearing age who are anaemic the challenge is immense. The rapid spike in food grain prices in late 2007 is estimated to have pushed a further 100 million families into hunger and poverty and whilst prices dropped again in the latter part of 2008, they are now on the rise again.

Add into the mix a growing demand for grains and meat, climate change, increasing water scarcity and a global population growing at 1.5 million people per week and it becomes clear that something radical has to be done. This has led the UK Chief Scientific Advisor, Professor John Beddington to predict “a perfect storm by 2030” with global shortages of food, water and energy.

To date, despite massive global population increases, scientific advances have meant that productivity gains of cereals (yields per hectare) have managed to feed the world’s increasing population, by and large without resorting to opening up more lands to agricultural cultivation. However, with a world population predicted to rise from 6 billion to 9 billion by 2050, hard choices and tradeoffs may have to be made. One speaker made the point that unless we are prepared to sacrifice non arable land including forests to crops, we have no alternative than to concentrate on increasing yield potential using cutting edge scientific technologies.

Signs of hope however include the potential for increasing yields through genomics-led genetic improvements to speed up plant breeding processes. Advances in genome analysis technology have meant that the rice gene has now been sequenced and DFID and BBSRC funded scientists are now exploring whether it is possible to sequence the more complex wheat gene. This may then have potential implications for maize and sorghum, thereby covering the world’s four major food security crops.

Now the rice genome has been sequenced, scientists are also trying to understand the genes responsible for resistance to Striga or Witchweed, a parasite estimated to cause annual losses of more than US$1 million on maize, sorghum, millet and upland rice, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. See the SARID (Sustainable Agricultural Research in Development) programme co-funded by BBSRC and DFID for details.

Whilst scientific advances are encouraging, Professor Andrew Dorward from SOAS also urged participants not to forget the importance of the social sciences in achieving food security and the need to also focus on increasing capital, resilience, voice and accountability processes. The session almost featured an interesting presentation by Professor Nick Mascie-Taylor looking at the impact of social protection programmes and tools on human nutritional status in Bangladesh, with mixed empirical evidence of success emerging.

A recent trend in development research programmes is to devote more resources to communication in the hope that results and evidence will reach audiences who can use this for innovation and impact.

In a recent edition of the LINK News Bulletin (PDF), Andy Hall cautions that there is no substitute for better linking of research to innovation in the first place.

Drawing on examples from DFID-supported healthcare projects in Nepal, he concludes: “If you want research to have an impact it has to be embedded in the development contexts in which it to be used. The emerging policy content of development research makes this doubly important. It seems that both bilateral and multilateral donors are uniquely placed to help embed research in their development assistance programme and act as champions of change to better leverage research results.”

More on the LINK initiative

DFID research strategy View outputs of DFID-funded research